Hi John,

What you say all makes sense to me as I thought there was a feature in VFP 7 that "would make it easier for developers to have their applications pass logo testing", but obviously VFP8 is defeating that. As for moving to .Net to resolve the issue, well, as I said in my post even MSCOREE.DLL is making calls to some strange API calls - however I think this may be due to some of the logic we are using to call VFP from things from .Net and vice-versa, but if it isn't our fault then moving to .Net won't help either unfortunately.

Of course I am still holding out hope that I haven't RTFM'ed well enough and that I am just running the tests wrongly - but there aren't many settings in these AppVerifier tests, they are either on or off. So it isn't looking good.

And so at the present time we are exploring this further, and looking at other ways to make up the points (we may be able to do it by adding a .NET web service to our app and getting the .Net Connected logo - no, a VFP web service won't cut it, it seems.)

(As much as I don't like the arguments on the UT between Terry and John etc. I have to agree here with John that this is indeed an issue that I either hope I am wrong about, or that MS will fix).

Chris.


>Kudos to Mr. Ormerod....
>
>Now this is indeed interesting...and an issue that is worth making a fuss about.
>
>FWIW gang, this is the type of stuff that is worth getting PO'd about. This is the type of thing you need to hit Ken over the head with. This is something that is fairly objective. You know...an app is either certified or not. And...if Fox makes API calls that defeat certification, then it follows that you cannot create an XP-Certified-Logo app in Fox. And what does that mean???? It means that for those who wish to keep thier partner status in fact, they are FORCED to leave VFP in favor .NET/SQL Server...
>
>This has nothing to do with emotion or irrational feelings. What Mr. Ormerrod has brought to light here - assuming it is all accurate - and it sounds like it is - a bona-fide issue with continuing to do VFP development - none of which is technical in nature.
>
>It seems to me that if at a low level - VFP makes unsupported API calls - there is no real work around to the issue.
>
>And FWIW, I absolutely believe it is 100% intentional. My guess is that a VB 6 app could not be verified. Although if it could, that alone should send a BIG message - one that is loud and clear. It would certainly defeat the arguments that VB is "dead".
>
>You have a legit issue here - and it is one that I would be concerned with. Start hammering on Ken to get an answer. It seems to me that if MS is still developing a product - and is still selling the product - you should be able to build XP-verified apps with it.
>
>That said...keep in mind that when 95 came out, for a while, 95-certified apps could not be built in VFP becuause VFP did not have the ability to create context-sensitive menus (at least to the degree necessary for certification).
>
>Good luck...